click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130211
20130219
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
and patriotism and service. my focus is entirely on his long-standing foreign policy record, and his opposition to sanctions to any form of direct action dealing with those who would cause harm. and so in no way, shape, or form have i impugned his pages is the i focus on his foreign policy record which even the "washington post" describes as the french. cycling the senator from florida suggested that i stated that mr. hagel has not been truthful. to the contrary, my point is exactly the opposite. that the question this committee asked whether he has director received money from foreign sources enables him to answer that truthfully, no, while at the same time not disclosing whether the hundreds of thousands of dollars he has received has come indirectly from foreign sources. his answers could be entirely truthful and yet the example i use of course, that money, that 200,000 could have come from a foreign nation, and he could answer that truthfully, no, i haven't received it but it came from an intermediary. and my point is not that he has lied. it is rather that he has refused to answer reasonab
and foreign policy organizations. at his january 31 nomination hearing, before the armed services committee, senator hagel was enthusiastically introduced and endorsed by two former chairmen of our committee, chairmen who have huge bipartisan support and respect by everybody in this body and everybody outside of this body who knows them, and those two chairmen are sam nunn and john warner. senator hagel's nomination has been endorsed by five former secretaries of defense who served under both democratic and republican presidents, bob gates, bill cohen, bill perry, harold brown and melvin leery. he has been endorsed by three former secretaries of state, madeleine albright, colin powell and george shultz, and by six former national security advisors who served in that position for more than 20 years under six of the last seven presidents. let me just share with our colleagues a few of the words of senator nunn when he introduced senator hagel to our committee. senator nunn said that i believe that our nation is fortunate to have a nominee for secretary of defense with the character, the exper
foreign policy tonight. you will hear about the president trying to, um, pull troops out of afghanistan. you can bet we'll hear that. and, of course, we'll probably hear about north korea since that happened today. i heard you mention that earlier. so that might change things a little bit. but i think there will be a good number of things that he will not mention, which is interesting. >> guest: for the record, i've never observed a pattern of wars beginning in conjunction with state of the union addresses. [laughter] but one thing i'm going to be watching for is the congressional black caucus met recently with valerie jarrett on the hill, and she's one of the president's top advisers. they discussed the state of the union to some extent, and the question i have is whether he's going to address black unemployment specifically and things that will help bring that number down. i think that that's what the congressional black caucus wants, but i don't know if that's what he's going to do. >> host: we're talking with anita kumar and jonathan strong, iowa anita works for mcclatchy newspapers
foreign policy. i don't of military. i don't the military tactics. once congress and the executive branch decide what the policy or program is, we didn't see how well it is done. if there's problems we make recommendations. so going back to the taxation issue, it's a critical issue. right now the afghan government, what they collect is about $2 billion a year. just paying for the afghan national security forces, is over 4 billion. then you at all those other programs. so the problem is you can see there's a delta between what the afghans collect and the cost of running their government, the cost of fighting the taliban, and possibly maintaining order there. that difference is being supported by the united states taxpayer and by our allies. but it conditions. the collar and others have some concerns. about how well that is being spent but that value, a lot of discussion they came out of the tokyu of course about the internet community is not going to want what they're trying to put conditions on, rightly so, on the build of the afghan government to govern and to fight corruption. and we wi
in iraq, the decision to help prevent our losing that war when he said was the most dangerous foreign policy blunder since vietnam. it's quite obvious now that that statement was his tree i don't know nick, woe -- was histrionic, woefully uninformed and absurd. i didn't raise it at senator hagel's hearing for an i told you so moment but to determine he if senator hagel recognizes he was in error. and more importantly, if that recognition informs his judgment today. i wanted to know if he had learned from his mistakes. unfortunately, i'm not confident that he has. after two weeks of reviewing his record, my concerns about whether senator hagel is ready to serve as secretary of defense have not diminished. nothing in senator hagel's background indicates that he would effectively manage the department of defense. in today's unprecedented environment of fiscal uncertainty, ensuring that defense investment decisions affecting an agency as massive and unwieldy as the department of defense do not adversely impact our military readiness is enormously challenging. it requires that the secretar
will continue that policy and also on the foreign investment and real-estate act whether you'd think the treasury department is guard to complete that irs notice and take actions that would help jump-start private investment. >> senator, the administration's proposal which would have limited the value of the top tax bracket to 28% was designed to try and restore some equity in the tax code and to generate revenue that we need for mira fiscal targets. it was not specifically directed at municipal bonds or other specific areas such activity. it was also meant to be a place holder, that we really should have tax reform and we should make specific policies deciding what is in and what is out of what the proper tax rates are. we put it as a fallback saying that if tax reform does not happen, this is something that would help us get to the revenue targets that we need. i would be happy to follow up with you on these issues of the individual component parts of tax reform, but i would say as a general proposition that the hard decision in tax reform will come in many cases, but as in places
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6